I have already mentioned in previous posts that in my many passions is bioethics. For lovers of esoteric religions and bioethics is a discipline that can not and should not be ignored. Unfortunately, there is a lot 'of confusion about this subject, as I noted recently. I was wandering through the Internet in search of a modern theologian wrote that I really appreciate (while disputing some things, no one is perfect ^_^): Hans Kung. He has written a very interesting article on euthanasia from several points of view and I wanted to mention it in an article on the theology that I am preparing. The eye rogue I then fell on several sites called "secular", including UAAR (atheists, agnostics, rationalists Union), and here my mind has given birth to another reflection.
In the post about the burning of the Koran I have already referred to as a result of bioethics colloborazione that exceeds their cultural and personal. I also explicitly condemned the ethical relativism, and it is from these two statements that I want to leave.
Bioethics deals with ethical issues related to human life, understood in its biological sense but also philosophical and social. The oncologist VR Potter, who first used the term by giving the present meaning, defines this discipline as the science of survival. This is, in my opinion, the best definition that contains the other drawn by subsequent bioethicists. The values that bioethics advocates are thus related to human existence in its various forms, and then embraces her birth, growth and death, shedding light on what behaviors are good and which are not. Bioethics is divided into two areas: Bioethics
-general, on moral philosophy, bioethics
-applied, which applies the principles of the general to specific cases.
addition to this division, there is one on ethical attitudes, of which only some are compatible with the principles of bioethics. The current ethics are:
- Ethics subjectivist-libertarian : everyone is master of himself and can do whatever they want, without being under the control of any external rule.
- utilitarian ethic: it is simply the individual and his personal satisfaction. So what is useful for that person is automatically good.
- technical and scientific ethics, sees the progress in science and the good of humanity. What can the science is ethically right.
- ecological ethics : focuses on the environment. The man must act in harmony with nature without disturbing the balance.
- personalistic ethics: humans correlates with society and with others. He says that if something is useful for an individual, not necessarily it is another.
- religious ethics: it derives from a sacred vision of the world, cognugandola with different religious beliefs. Possiedeprincipi socially useful, valid for non-believer.
Among these types of ethics, the first three are usually discarded in bioethics, and there are also discussions on the latest. I say usually because there are people who, by appealing to the "freedom" and ethical relativism, declares that everyone has the right to do what he wants and all ethics is another. If so, then there would be no laws and even the state. Men can not live without rules, based only on spontaneity, on the fickle will a single moment. Anarchy is bad at least since the dictatorship. I speak from rational person with common sense, nor a Catholic, nor by an atheist, nor a communist or in the name of another ideology. Have a reason, in fact, means to realize that if you want to live well with other people, both in social as in the family, please adhere to rules that protect the freedom of all without oppressing anyone. It goes without saying that the sacrifice is implied. And this is perhaps one of the major problems in the application of bioethics in the life of every day. No one wants to sacrifice in the name of a common good. Even worse, no one wants to recognize the value of one point of view other than their own, seeking a happy medium to avoid the chaos.
This became a beast when I read of secular bioethics and religious bioethics. Bioethics bioethics must be just, plain and simple. You must take care of the human person, Catholic or atheist that the follower of another creed. This must be based on common values \u200b\u200band not objectionable. Unfortunately it is not easy to determine these values. On all sides there is hostility and inability to grasp the positive things the opposite faction. The fault lies with everyone, of course, without distinction of party and religion. Everyone pulls water to his mill and staple the allegations. We begin by making a picture black opponent, in a few concise words and throwing shit at will, without the slightest regard to discern strengths and weaknesses. Is not the usual excuse of traditionalism and modernism, with all the factions deployed to advance on both sides. Infuse is that what we inculcate the right and the Church are on the side of tradition, the left on the side of modernity, and the center does not know which side to take. As if the traditional and the modern incarnation, from time to time based on the feedback, now the absolute good now evil.
Only a lucid reason and without pregidizi can understand that bioethics needs the values \u200b\u200bthat promote human dignity, and these values \u200b\u200bcan be part also opposing sides. Diversity is an asset, not a threat. One must compare them with respect, ready to accept what the other has to offer, but also to understand the importance of the value that follows. Recalling that everyone can fall by the zeal of fanaticism by supporting radical positions and exaggerated. I want to conclude with the statement by Umberto Eco about the existence of universal semantic notions that are common to all cultures. From these general principles arise the fundamental rights of every man who must always be respected and protected. As always says Eco
"The ethical dimension begins when he enters the other."
http://it.wrs.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9mSvdy1T5FMLVsBwElHDwx.; _ylu = = X3oDMTExcXNkdHFhBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2lyZAR2dGlkAwRsA1dTMQ--/SIG 11pmtp56b/EXP = 1284677941 / ** http% 3A / / it.wikipedia.org / wiki / Bioethics
http://it.wrs.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9mSvdy1T5FMLVsBwklHDwx.;_ylu=X3oDMTExbnU0NGppBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMgRjb2xvA2lyZAR2dGlkAwRsA1dTMQ--/SIG=11kqkjbot/EXP=1284677941/**http%3A//www.portaledibioetica.it/
http://it.wrs.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9mSvdy1T5FMLVsBxElHDwx.;_ylu=X3oDMTExNmdlNGE5BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMwRjb2xvA2lyZAR2dGlkAwRsA1dTMQ--/SIG=11i1951m1/EXP=1284677941/**http%3A//bioetiche.blogspot.com/
http://it.wrs.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9mSvdy1T5FMLVsBxklHDwx.;_ylu=X3oDMTExMjhjczNnBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDNARjb2xvA2lyZAR2dGlkAwRsA1dTMQ--/SIG=11tk17g3d/EXP=1284677941/**http%3A//www.istitutobioetica.org/index.htm
http://it.wrs.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9mSvdy1T5FMLVsByElHDwx.; _ylu = = X3oDMTExNGQ0ZHFhBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDNQRjb2xvA2lyZAR2dGlkAwRsA1dTMQ--/SIG 11mff3q0m/EXP = 1284677941 / ** http% 3A / / www.consultadibioetica.org/
ps : in the photo, this should be true that bioethics: harmony and cooperation but without a chaotic mixture
0 comments:
Post a Comment